↓ Skip to main content

Patient factors associated with non-attendance at colonoscopy after a positive screening faecal occult blood test

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Screening, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Patient factors associated with non-attendance at colonoscopy after a positive screening faecal occult blood test
Published in
Journal of Medical Screening, May 2016
DOI 10.1177/0969141316645629
Pubmed ID
Authors

Plumb, Andrew A, Ghanouni, Alex, Rainbow, Sandra, Djedovic, Natasha, Marshall, Sarah, Stein, Judith, Taylor, Stuart A, Halligan, Steve, Lyratzopoulos, Georgios, von Wagner, Christian, Plumb, AA, Andrew A Plumb, Alex Ghanouni, Sandra Rainbow, Natasha Djedovic, Sarah Marshall, Judith Stein, Stuart A Taylor, Steve Halligan, Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Christian von Wagner

Abstract

Screening participants with abnormal faecal occult blood test results who do not attend further testing are at high risk of colorectal cancer, yet little is known about their reasons for non-attendance. We conducted a medical record review of 170 patients from two English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme centres who had abnormal guaiac faecal occult blood test screening tests between November 2011 and April 2013 but did not undergo colonoscopy. Using information from patient records, we coded and categorized reasons for non-attendance. Of the 170 patients, 82 were eligible for review, of whom 66 had at least one recorded reason for lack of colonoscopy follow-up. Reasons fell into seven main categories: (i) other commitments, (ii) unwillingness to have the test, (iii) a feeling that the faecal occult blood test result was a false positive, (iv) another health issue taking priority, (v) failing to complete bowel preparation, (vi) practical barriers (e.g. lack of transport), and (vii) having had or planning colonoscopy elsewhere. The most common single reasons were unwillingness to have a colonoscopy and being away. We identify a range of apparent reasons for colonoscopy non-attendance after a positive faecal occult blood test screening. Education regarding the interpretation of guaiac faecal occult blood test findings, offer of alternative confirmatory test options, and flexibility in the timing or location of subsequent testing might decrease non-attendance of diagnostic testing following positive faecal occult blood test.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 6 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 22%
Researcher 4 15%
Other 4 15%
Student > Postgraduate 1 4%
Other 6 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 48%
Unspecified 7 26%
Psychology 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 3 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 June 2016.
All research outputs
#6,883,114
of 7,953,275 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Screening
#210
of 243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,861
of 270,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Screening
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,953,275 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 243 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 270,406 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.